Impact of Communication Errors in Radiology on Patient Care, Customer Satisfaction, and Work-Flow Efficiency.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of communication errors on patient care, customer satisfaction, and work-flow efficiency and to identify opportunities for quality improvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a search of our quality assurance database for communication errors submitted from August 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Cases were analyzed regarding the step in the imaging process at which the error occurred (i.e., ordering, scheduling, performance of examination, study interpretation, or result communication). The impact on patient care was graded on a 5-point scale from none (0) to catastrophic (4). The severity of impact between errors in result communication and those that occurred at all other steps was compared. Error evaluation was performed independently by two board-certified radiologists. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-square test and kappa statistics. RESULTS Three hundred eighty of 422 cases were included in the study. One hundred ninety-nine of the 380 communication errors (52.4%) occurred at steps other than result communication, including ordering (13.9%; n = 53), scheduling (4.7%; n = 18), performance of examination (30.0%; n = 114), and study interpretation (3.7%; n = 14). Result communication was the single most common step, accounting for 47.6% (181/380) of errors. There was no statistically significant difference in impact severity between errors that occurred during result communication and those that occurred at other times (p = 0.29). In 37.9% of cases (144/380), there was an impact on patient care, including 21 minor impacts (5.5%; result communication, n = 13; all other steps, n = 8), 34 moderate impacts (8.9%; result communication, n = 12; all other steps, n = 22), and 89 major impacts (23.4%; result communication, n = 45; all other steps, n = 44). In 62.1% (236/380) of cases, no impact was noted, but 52.6% (200/380) of cases had the potential for an impact. CONCLUSION Among 380 communication errors in a radiology department, 37.9% had a direct impact on patient care, with an additional 52.6% having a potential impact. Most communication errors (52.4%) occurred at steps other than result communication, with similar severity of impact.

[1]  Brian Bjørn,et al.  Descriptions of verbal communication errors between staff. An analysis of 84 root cause analysis-reports from Danish hospitals , 2011, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[2]  Steven H. Woolf,et al.  A String of Mistakes: The Importance of Cascade Analysis in Describing, Counting, and Preventing Medical Errors , 2004, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[3]  Joann G. Elmore,et al.  Open Notes: Doctors and Patients Signing On , 2010, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  S. Swensen,et al.  Radiologic quality and safety: mapping value into radiology. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[5]  M. M. Raskin.  Survival strategies for radiology: some practical tips on how to reduce the risk of being sued and losing. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[6]  Anuj K. Dalal,et al.  Changes in medical errors after implementation of a handoff program. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Jacob Sosna,et al.  Strategies for establishing a comprehensive quality and performance improvement program in a radiology department. , 2009, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[8]  Luca Brunese,et al.  Spectrum of diagnostic errors in radiology. , 2010, World journal of radiology.

[9]  R. J. Brenner,et al.  Radiology and medical malpractice claims: a report on the practice standards claims survey of the Physician Insurers Association of America and the American College of Radiology. , 1998, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  Jacob Sosna,et al.  Implementation of online radiology quality assurance reporting system for performance improvement: initial evaluation. , 2006, Radiology.

[11]  Leonard Berlin,et al.  Communicating results of all radiologic examinations directly to patients: has the time come? , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  A. Karera,et al.  A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN RADIOGRAPHERS AND PATIENTS AT TWO HOSPITALS , 2013 .

[13]  K. Berbaum,et al.  Error in radiology: classification and lessons in 182 cases presented at a problem case conference. , 1992, Radiology.

[14]  P. Fritzsche.  Communication: the key to improved patient care. , 2005, Radiology.

[15]  S. Woolf,et al.  Patient Reports of Preventable Problems and Harms in Primary Health Care , 2004, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[16]  Amy J. Starmer,et al.  I-PASS, a Mnemonic to Standardize Verbal Handoffs , 2012, Pediatrics.

[17]  R. Khorasani,et al.  Gastrointestinal stromal tumor: optimizing the use of cross-sectional chest imaging during follow-up. , 2015, Radiology.

[18]  D. Levine,et al.  The complementary nature of peer review and quality assurance data collection. , 2015, Radiology.

[19]  Roger B. Davis,et al.  Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  R. J. Brenner,et al.  Communication errors in radiology: a liability cost analysis. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.